(02-27-2020 09:25 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-27-2020 09:24 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-27-2020 06:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-26-2020 11:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-26-2020 10:33 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I don't think their concern is telling - what makes you believe their opinion on the macro-economic implications of a Sander's presidency, especially given the uncertainty around the makeup of the House and Senate after the election, is worthwhile?

Right now it's pearl clutching by a bunch of billionaires worried about potential increases in taxes, without much substance behind the pearl-clutching.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/...li=BBnbfcN

“2. The 2020 election

Uncertainty about the U.S. presidential election’s outcome is also starting to drive markets, strategists and analysts argue. A number of them think that if Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who characterizes himself as a democratic socialist, wins the Democratic presidential nomination, and possibly even the presidency, stocks would take a hit as he is perceived by some as an antibusiness candidate. “The risk to U.S. stocks is pretty significant if Bernie gets the nomination,” said Ed Moya, a senior market analyst with OANDA.”

I guess the market analysts and strategists are clutching their pearls.

Again, an indicator based solely on an impression, not on actual outcomes. Bernie isn’t even one party’s nominee yet.

Plus, as I’ve mentioned before, the market has become a poorer and poorer way to measure the health of the economy, especially since some 40-50% of US citizens don’t own any stock.

Frankly, the coronavirus is having a bigger impact on the stock market, due in part to the fact that the Trump admin cut positions and funding for the CDC, making people in the US more anxious about our response. Well, and the fact that Pence, who oversaw an HIV epidemic due to his mismanagement of needle exchanges in India, is heading up the coronavirus response. Oh yeah, and add on stories in the news about how someone voluntarily got tested for the coronavirus, and was then slapped with a >$1,000 bill because of insurance issues.

Apparently you did not click on my link either, either, or you would notice that what I quoted was listed as #2 of 5 issues. The corona virus was #1.

Lots of people don’t own stock, true. It is also true that you don’t need to own stock to be affected, something people with triple digit IQs would understand if they wanted to.

The stock market is like a thermometer or a blood pressure cuff - it is an indicator. Duh.

If you wait for actual outcomes, it is too late. Like waiting for more deaths before fighting the opioid crises. Duh.

You should drink your coffee before posting.

Obviously I clicked on your link - that's why I referenced the f****** coronavirus.

Holy ****.

So your “frankly” sentence could be be restated as “Frankly, #1 is more important than #2”?

Duh. Again.

I posted that #2 section to show that responsible people are also “clutching their pearls”, not to argue that the corona virus was not a factor. Duh.

Drink your coffee. Three cups should get you there.